Marketing for escorts

A post by Livvy about hotels that segues into a discussion about marketing.  A few brief excerpts to tease you:

If you pretend to be something you’re not, your client is bound to find out when they meet you, just as a hotel guest is bound to find out when they check in. . . . Similarly, if you claim to be a twenty four year old English escort based in London, with an economics degree from Cambridge, your client is going to notice if you’re in your mid forties, bill them for international flights from Sofia, have a heavy foreign accent, and can’t work out the change for the parking meter. There’s nothing wrong with being in your forties, from outside the UK and better at sex than maths, and all of those might be considered unique selling points by a lot of clients, but only if you’re honest. It’s also worth noting that lifting copy verbatim from other people’s websites is bad form and bad karma. Escorts describing themselves as intelligent courtesans would be wise to learn how to spell both words.

and

The most important things any escort needs to know about marketing are the same ones that a hotelier needs to bear in mind when marketing a hotel. Namely to be honest, not to oversell, and to focus on keeping existing customers rather than attracting new ones.

Well, you’ve probably run across similar sentiments before . . . but not expressed in Livvy’s rather unique voice and with that charming wit (which these small excerpts don’t begin to adequately reflect).  Reading her blog always makes me smile. If she’s half as good as a courtesan as she is as a writer . . . .

OK, off with you now, go read the whole thing for yourself — along with the rest of her blog!

A proud whore

Check out Gillette’s post about “I Am A Proud Whore And More“; some good reading, including the comments.  A few brief excerpts (but go read the whole thing, OK?):

In the end, the only thing that separates me from most of the people who read this blog is that I chose to be sexual with people who gave me money. I chose to cross a line most people don’t choose to cross. They may not go there out of simple preference, fear or judgment (which many would say is just a form of fear). Or, perhaps, because they simple hadn’t thought about it. But no matter what the reason, it’s the only thing makes me different from you.

and, after pointing out the other aspects of her life (because we are all more than merely how we earn a living):

Are you fucking kidding me that none of this matters? None of it?

Apparently, for the vast majority of the world it doesn’t.

Probably many ladies in P4P have similar thoughts, but few express them as lucidly and eloquently as Gillette.

If and when to review

[This was initially part of an earlier post, but it really should be broken out separately.]

In this thread on ASPD, among all the silliness about post-to-review ratios, there is actually some good discussion about the benefits of reviews.  CaitieMae in particular makes a good point (as she has several other times) about the value of reviews, not merely to prospective clients but also to the lady reviewed.  She relies much more on reviews than she does on ads.  Ditto with Angie’s post.  Also, this comment by L.A.:

Why in the world would you refuse to write a review of a lady you had a good time with who uses ASPD to market herself? She posts ads on here, you see an ad, you schedule a session, you have a good time with her. Why would you not help her out with a review of your time together? Is it because you’re lazy? Is it because you are scared somebody won’t like what was written? Other than seeing a provider and paying her fee what better way to help her out than with some positive publicity?

But the statements about why clients should post reviews are rather broad and general; I think there’s room for some distinctions.

Online

I ran across this article about Craigslist — including its P4P component — the other day; found it interesting, particularly for some of the comments about the nature of an online community.  For example:

A couple of new blogs

New additions to my blogroll.  Try them, you may like them.

Deuce Bigalow — a former moderator/administrator for ASPD Dallas.  To date, his entries are a review of the founding and history of ASPD.  A fascinating tour.  (It reminds me also of the advice, which I’ve followed, of going back into archives and reading the early posts in a board.  You can find some interesting things, including that many splinter boards today sound rather similar to how ASPD sounded back then.  Implications for the future?)

Juliette/Enchantment [link removed, no longer active] — a young lady who . . . well, in her own words: “Currently, I am not an active companion, having chosen to refine my talents and skills and discover what I want from myself as a companion before I taking clients. This blog is a record of that study and exploration, as well as a place for me to express my passions and thoughts.”

Enjoy.

Post-to-review ratio

Another one of those silly posts dissing those on a P4P board with a high ratio of posts to reviews, as not “contributing” enough to the community.  So . . . just out of curiosity . . . I checked a few:

A different state of mind

I think my attitude toward P4P has changed recently.  After 30 plus years. Well, maybe it’s been a gradual change that just hasn’t manifested itself this way until recently.  But now it’s changing my approach/behavior in ways I wouldn’t have anticipated a few months ago.  Hopefully in a non-negative way, although conventional wisdom suggests that it may indicate some degree of danger — either from me, or to me.

Specifically, I may have become a “unilaterally monogamous” client.  Or perhaps retired and just don’t know it yet.

Criminalization, part two

Late last year, I blogged about a post by Livvy concerning efforts to criminalize P4P in Europe (which we in the US have always considered much more enlightened on the issue — at least, those of us in the US who participate ourselves ).  Now, a UK story about the subject from the feminist/workers’ rights perspective.  (Thanks to Nia for pointing that out to me!)

I highly recommend both; some very interesting discussions.  More sophisticated than the typical “analysis” one sees occasionally elsewhere, which usually doesn’t go very far beyond “Why aren’t the cops out catching the real criminals?”

So, why are you still here???  Go read (or re-read) Livvy’s post and this new article that Nia ran across!!

Anti-review

There are some ladies who do not want their clients to post reviews of the encounter on the P4P review/discussion boards.  Similarly, there are some clients who do not want the ladies they see to post reviews of the encounter on those boards that allow reviews of clients (of which there are at least three with a significant presence in the Dallas area).

From what I’ve seen, there’s a higher percentage of clients who do not want to be reviewed than of ladies who do not want to be reviewed.  Reviews are not the only source of business for escorts, but they likely have some positive impact — otherwise, why would so many ladies refer to or even provide links to their reviews in their advertising or sig lines?  Even if reviews don’t help the ladies directly, allowing reviews may be a prerequisite for posting ads.  Otherwise, more ladies would ask for a non-review policy, I suspect.  It is not yet common that a lady would refuse to see a prospective client without being able to check out several reviews of him, though, so the consequences of prohibiting reviews are less significant for clients.  But both ladies and clients sometimes opt out from being reviewed.

In my opinion, for either gender, not wanting to be reviewed seems entirely reasonable and may be motivated by a lot of reasons that do not reflect badly on that person.  They find reviews distasteful or unpleasant (even if positive); they prefer more privacy/discretion/a lower profile; etc., etc.  Nothing wrong with that preference, for either gender, in my view.  Similarly, those who don’t mind being reviewed, or decide to allow it for practical reasons, are also being entirely reasonable (as least as long as they allow an opt-out for the first group).  And I see nothing intrinsically wrong with those who like writing or reading reviews.  (How the review is written, of course, is another matter.)

Those positions are not inconsistent, so you would hope that people with differing preferences on this issue could coexist peacefully.  Unfortunately, this is one of those hot button topics that can lead to heated and emotional arguments.

Stalking, deceiving, outing, and banning

There was a lot of furor on ASPD in late January about the “Holly/PatB situation.”  Discussed here.  In short:

• Escort doesn’t want to see a guy because of his bad reputation among local escorts.
• He sets up a fake identity and submits that information to her screener; deception to get around her desire to avoid seeing him.
• For whatever reason (we hear different versions — another escort provided a reference for him, knowing his true identity; or screener not checking with references), he gets by her screening and sees her at least twice, maybe more times.
• She didn’t have a problem with him initially, evidenced by her willingness to see him again.
• Either because he was rough and hurt her on the last visit (she says, without specifics, and he denies) or because he wrote a review which disclosed his deception and she finally found out that “Joe Smith” was the same as “PatB” on ASPD . . . she got mad and posted an alert.  The alert included phone numbers and a link to his My
  Space page.  (The latter is not tied in any way to APSD, but some say that it is linked to his id on TER.)
• Because she posted personal information that might disclose his civilian identity, against the instructions by the staff, Holly is banned.
• It turns out that PatB has several handles on ASPD, also a violation of the rules, and he is banned as well.

In short, a big mess.  And perhaps some interesting aspects worth discussing?